Battlefield Wiki:Requests for Adminship
__NEWSECTIONLINK__ Recently many people have asked to become admins, and it is apparent more are needed. Previously I have simply upgraded as I saw fit, but I think there should be some form of process, so here it is. You may nominate yourself or another editor (must have their consent), by following the instructions below: How to Nominate *Click the +''' button on the top bar *In the section name, type the name of the user, and format to remove the prefix eg. '''Example *For the content, add and click save *Text will appear in the new section, edit it and answer the questions *After 7 days, you will either be declared successful or unsuccessful How to Vote You can support, oppose, comment or question. Just follow the instructions Rules *To vote, you must have at least 20 edits over 1 month (to prevent multiple account abuse, any suspect accounts will be IP verified). Any ineligible votes will be struck-out and ignored. (Per BF:VOTE) *You should not request admin status unless you have 100 mainspace edits and been here for 1 month. If you do, it will be immediately rejected and moved straight to the archives. Upon being concluded, nominations will be archived to Battlefield Wiki:Requests for Adminship/Archive TheManOfIron (3) Section 1 Nominator's Opening Statement: In a few sentences, summarise your views on what the role of an administrator is and why you think you are suitable. This section should be completed by the nominator, if you are nominating somebody else, you should complete this section about the editor you are nominating, and the nominee should briefly state that they agree. :I've nothing to lose, so I might as well go ahead. I have been observing this wiki for a while now, and while it isn't the best wiki, I have witnessed a very good wiki, the Call of Duty wiki. If I am to be nominated and the vote passed for this seat of an sysop, I believe I can take my observance from the Call of Duty Wiki here, and I can probably do a very good job at being in this seat. This Wiki has very little administators, and could most likely use some more, and I am always open for the job, and I think I would do quiet a GOOD job, in fact, and that is why I am nominating myself for the seat of an administator, and think of it this way. If I am nominated, and I abuse the power, you undo anything I did, strip me of the power and ban me. However, if you never nominate me in the first place, you wouldn't ever know how well I may be quited for the job, thus the loss is only on the shoulders of you guys, the Battlefield Wiki. :--TheManOfIron '' :: '' Section 2 Please answer the following questions honestly and as fully as you can in the space provided. This section should only be completed by the nominee. 1) Why do you think you should be made an admin and how would you use the extra responsibilities and tools? :A: '' '' 2) How often do you visit and how often do you edit? Do you anticipate your activity levels changing in the immediate future? When you visit, what do you typically do (eg. edit, read, check the forums/blogs, check recent changes, upload images)? :A: '' '' 3) Which pages do you mainly edit (eg. Articles, Forums, Blogs, Templates, Talks, Images, User)? If you were made an admin, would this change? :A:'' '' Section 3 The following is for an admin to add (don't worry, they are all 0 until updated): As of July 25, 2010 *Total edits: 430 ::Of which 63 are to mainspace articles (14.65%) *Total uploads: 0''' ::Of which '''4 have been deleted ::And 0''' are currently in a category deemed unsatisfactory *Total blocks: '''7 ::Totalling a block time of 6 days *Active since: May 18, 2010 Voting Vote below using *'''Support - Reason - ~~~~''' or *'''Oppose - Reason - ~~~~'. You may also question the candidate using ':Question? - ~~~~'. You may also comment or respond using '::Comment - ~~~~''' *'Strong Oppose-' "Total blocks: 7. Totalling a block time of 6 days." 'Nuff said. Helljumper U T *'Strong Oppose' - Same as above, but also with the recent block, I don't think you're ready HeatedPeteTalk 15:50, July 25, 2010 (UTC) *'Oppose' - Not enough edits, especially not mainspace. Too many blocks. Definatly not after this recent incident. Sorry. - Bondpedia' (Contact • ) 15:51, July 25, 2010 (UTC) *'Insanely strong (Chuck Norris strong) Oppose' - Way too much block time, can be extremely arrogant and unprofessional, and is generally the start of multiple flamewars. 404 Error [[User talk:Sactage|'File Not Found']] *'Oppose' - Although I don't necessarily see bad in you, I'll oppose. Why? Well, You can get in such tantrums, that have disrupted the community, who knows what you'd actually think of doing as an admin. Second, block time - too long, honestly. Third, you say that we're "bad" compared to the CoD Wiki, but we have taken off of many view points of the CoD Wiki, we have based our core upon the CoD Wiki's methods, and if you seriously have any more to add, any normal user can do it and, heck, Doc.Richtofen is a super user over there, so we get the picture. Finally, after what's happened here, coming from you in particular, I don't think you'd ever be ready to become an admin here. I'll even quote, what was once on your user page: "Fuck this wiki. I do not support dictatorships ...", which you didn't even take off your userpage yourself. And we were even considering perma-banning you at one point. I could go on, but that's enough. Just no. SSD 天皇陛下萬歳！02:46, July 26, 2010 (UTC) *'Oppose' - Nothing against you (I don't know anything about any incidents anywhere) but you have a small amount of edits! You aren't even a Trusted User yet! If you added that and a few hundred '''''mainspace edits under your belt, you might be in for it. *'Extremely Strong Oppose' - I can't take this seriously, especially after you so glamorously announced that you were leaving the wiki...then wanting to leave again??? *'Extremely Strong Oppose' - When you just let it be known you're leaveing? Plus barely any mainspace edits, recent blocks. 16:09, July 26, 2010 (UTC) *'Oppose' - Well, yeah, per everything above. --CodExpert 16:17, July 26, 2010 (UTC) Results After 7 days, an admin will close the discussion, file the results below, and move the discussion to the archive Result: Bureaucrat action: CruzDude Section 1 Nominator's Opening Statement: In a few sentences, summarise your views on what the role of an administrator is and why you think you are suitable. This section should be completed by the nominator, if you are nominating somebody else, you should complete this section about the editor you are nominating, and the nominee should briefly state that they agree. :I have come a long way on this wiki. I used to be a "noob", in experienced with a few hundred edits. Times have changed. I currently have the second most edits out of any non-admin, fifth overall. I became the first Trusted User, received the editor award, joined the vandal patrol, and I am currently nominated for User of the month. I think that my time for adminship is here. I hold something that many admins and even users don't have, a homegrown start here (started editing here). So now the votes are up to you. ''CruzDude {Talk} { } 15:44, July 26, 2010 (UTC) '' ::'' '' Section 2 Please answer the following questions honestly and as fully as you can in the space provided. This section should only be completed by the nominee. 1) Why do you think you should be made an admin and how would you use the extra responsibilities and tools? :A: I have great experience on this wiki, I have dealt in situations, being a peace maker, and at other times a punisher. I have community acknowledge experience, with my many awards. Awards can only go so far. I have the 5th amount of edits over all, I have reated 20 pages, and I have helped to revitalize many other pages. 2) How often do you visit and how often do you edit? Do you anticipate your activity levels changing in the immediate future? When you visit, what do you typically do (eg. edit, read, check the forums/blogs, check recent changes, upload images)? :A: I visit daily and edit often. It depends when I am motivated to create articles, and sometimes I go on "editing sprees" so this all depends. The only time difference will of course be school, but any loose time is Battlefield time! '' '''3)' Which pages do you mainly edit (eg. Articles, Forums, Blogs, Templates, Talks, Images, User)? If you were made an admin, would this change? :A:Well, my current editing (mainly articles) would not change, their may be more talk page edits, because admins handle the affairs of this wiki. '' Section 3 The following is for an admin to add (don't worry, they are all 0 until updated): As of January 1, 2010 *Total edits: '''1338' ::Of which 785 are to mainspace articles (58.67%) *Total uploads: 103 ::Of which 0''' have been deleted ::And '-' are currently in a category deemed unsatisfactory *Total blocks: '''0 ::Totalling a block time of 0 hours *Active since: March 16, 2010 Voting Vote below using *'''Support - Reason - ~~~~''' or *'''Oppose - Reason - ~~~~'. You may also question the candidate using ':Question? - ~~~~'. You may also comment or respond using '::Comment - ~~~~''' *'Support' - I think you've become one of this wiki's greatest assets, and would be delighted to enter you into the admin's club *'Support' - He was swift to warn me with a warning template on my page when I broke a rule. Not only did he do that, but when I went on to try and explain myself, he went on to further explain why I was warned. All of these were done in a very mature and professional way, which is what we all want to see in an admin. --Callofduty4 (Talk) 16:04, July 26, 2010 (UTC) *'Support '- Very good with the rules of the wiki, warns anyone who needs it, and as Callofduty4 has said, everything he does is very professional. He's done a good bit of mainspace editing, very active. 16:17, July 26, 2010 (UTC) *'Support' - He's a user that is very dedicated to this wiki and has shown himself in a way that is very professional, smart, friendly, active, and he would really benefit as an administrator on the Battlefield Wiki. --CodExpert 16:22, July 26, 2010 (UTC) *'Strong Support' - I'm very pleased with Cruz's progress. He is the very reason I set up the trusted user scheme. He started as an inexperienced user, but showed promise. As he said, he's now showing serious promise in the community and in the mainspace. I think his achievements speak for themselves. A perfect choice. - ''Bondpedia (Contact • )'' 16:56, July 26, 2010 (UTC) *'One Hell of a Support' - He's a great user - good, friendly person and a great editor. I was even thinking of suggesting him once. I think he could do a lot of good with those admin rights. SSD 天皇陛下萬歳！ 17:15, July 26, 2010 (UTC) Results After 7 days, an admin will close the discussion, file the results below, and move the discussion to the archive Result: Bureaucrat action: